SHRI DIGAMBAR JAIN ATISHAY KSHETRA CHAMATKAR MANDIR,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), KOTA

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 14-12-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 raising grounds of appeal

at Form No. 36. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that there is delay of 49 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the assessee has submitted an application for condonation of delay alongwith affidavit praying therein that 2. Shri Digambar Jain Atishay Kshetra Chamatkar Mandir VS ITO (EXEMPTION) ‘’during the limitation period my father suffered from Knee Osteoarthritis and I was busy in knees surgery of my father and was not in office working during the end of the limitation period’’ Thus the assessee submitted that delay was not intentional but it was due to unavoidable circumstances and the delay occurred in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld.DR submitted that the Court may decide the issue as deem fit and proper in the case. 2.3 After hearing both the parties and perusing the documents placed before the Bench, it is noted that there is merit in the submission of the assessee . Hence, the delay is condoned 3.1 Further, at the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee and the narration as mentioned therein are as under:- ‘’5.4 During the course of appellate proceedings, sufficient opportunities were given to the appellant however, no submissions/ evidence/ documents have been filed by the appellant to substantiate the grounds of appeal. The appellant was given specific opportunity to file any details filed by him before any authority physically/ online earlier as no replies of the appellant are found existing in the online system. Thus, in the absence of any submission/documents, I have no material to interfere with observation and addition made by the AO. In view of the above, I uphold the decision of the AO and confirm the

6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. …..’’ 3.2 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it is noted that the assessee has not filed any submissions and evidences relating to the case before the ld. CIT(A) and thus the ld.CIT(A) has no other alternative except to confirm the action of the AO being the assessee remained ex-parte before the AO. It is also noted that the ld. AR of the assessee prayed for one more chance to contest the case before the AO while as the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). The Bench feels that one more chance may be given to the Assessee to contest the case before the AO for afresh adjudication and the assessee will submit the necessary documents / evidences concerning the above mentioned appeal. Thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing. The assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3.3 Before parting, the Bench makes it clear that Bench decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by AO independently in accordance with law.